Widgets Magazine
Page 4 of 25 FirstFirst 123456789 ... LastLast
Results 76 to 100 of 609

Thread: Maps 3

  1. #76

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Quote Originally Posted by Larry OKC View Post
    Am surprised there hasn't been hardly any mention of the first meeting of the MAPS 3 oversight Board that was held this week. Think Steve alluded to it in a thread or his blog about anyone doubting the Mayor's new convention center preference.

    I will say this, I don't recall seeing anything about it in the paper (before/after) or on these threads. Am sure there had to be public posting of the meeting, agenda etc. I am in the middle of watching it so not ready to comment otherwise yet but did any one else catch it (was right before the morning Lets Talk Transit meeting). Thoughts?
    Well what he said was basically, "Come hell or high water, $30 million is going to OG&E for that land (between the park and Shields Blvd)."

  2. #77

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    If we can't get the cotton gin land for a reasonable amount close to that then I'm not sure I think that's wrong. If we can get that land for $30 million and the cotton gin land is truly $125 million, then I don't think the location is worth the extra expenditure. But if we end up with the convention center by the park we HAVE do do something like residential on the west side of the building to avoid the big box. And we must have streetcar access to Bricktown.

  3. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Quote Originally Posted by Spartan View Post
    Well what he said was basically, "Come hell or high water, $30 million is going to OG&E for that land (between the park and Shields Blvd)."
    Interesting take..just rewatched that part and this is what I got from it:

    The budget for the C.C. is $250M. As MAPS 3 approached the City discovered the cost to move the OG&E substation could be significant, so another $30M was added in the campaign numbers to cover that. It was not put into the budget to make the C.C. bigger etc (they can't pick the other site and think they have an extra $30M to play with).

    From the Mayor's remarks, it sounded like what you said, that the $30M is going to OG&E no matter what. But if the C.C. doesn't go along the Park is there any need to move the substation or are they going to do that no matter where the C.C. goes?

    It may be later in the meeting but I didn't get from the Mayor's presentation that the park site is IT. He is still saying that the site hasn't been selected but it is basically down to two (he didn't specifically identify it).

    Midtowner: I agree (at least in the 1st meeting, probably wouldn't be a good idea to run contrary to the Mayor). The Mayor's presentation was ok but certainly not worthy of the enthusiastic, "that is the best presentation ever made" type of remark and applause from the board president.


  4. #80

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Larry, I would think that the substation needs to be moved no matter what, and soon..so that may be what Mayor Mick is getting at. Either way you crack it we can tell he has certainly struck some $30 mil deal with them that we're just now finding out about, but it may not mean much about the convention center because we all know the best use of that land is mixed-use development and retaining the normal street grid and not consolidating it into a huge superblock that constricts city flow.

    If that makes sense. Sounds like a Kelo v. New Haven thing to me, so perhaps Mayor Mick's deal we're now finding out about is a GREAT thing--especially if they budgeted it into MAPS as an additional cost to the convention center. I was wondering why 500,000 sf would cost $280 mil..

    Quote Originally Posted by betts View Post
    If we can't get the cotton gin land for a reasonable amount close to that then I'm not sure I think that's wrong. If we can get that land for $30 million and the cotton gin land is truly $125 million, then I don't think the location is worth the extra expenditure. But if we end up with the convention center by the park we HAVE do do something like residential on the west side of the building to avoid the big box. And we must have streetcar access to Bricktown.
    Well, if the asking price on the cotton gin land is really $125 million..it's called eminent domain. LOL

    As for $30 million to OG&E, keep in mind that I don't think OG&E is even half of the land they will need for the convention center, just for some reason the most expensive chunk. The substation is one block between Robinson and Broadway, and there's another block between Broadway and Shields.

    Truthfully I would think the land is worthless without C2S, so as far as public opinion may be swayed by eminent domain, anything the city gives those landowners is a gift--granted OG&E does have significant infrastructure there (not $30 mil worth).

  5. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Quote Originally Posted by Doug Loudenback View Post
    Is this meeting's video on-line somewhere?
    Would guess it might be available on the City's website (but I haven't been very successful when I have looked for stuff there)

    Will most likely be replayed on Cox but the problem with that is I don't know if they have a schedule of what replays when...I was fortunate and caught most of it live (was able to hit record and go back to bed...LOL)

    I do have it on DVD and could make a copy and somehow get it to you if online or Cox doesn't work out.

  6. #82

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Spartan, in Oklahoma, absent a blight declaration, which is what clearly could and should happen here, so this is an academic point, the Supreme Court's holding in Kelo has been specifically overruled on state Constitutional grounds. I believe I've given you the citation before.

    At any rate, that doesn't apply here because the cotton plant and the OG&E substation can both fall under the expansive definition of blight. When I see these land deals for $30MM, for example, I immediately jump to the conclusion that someone's fix is in. These property owners should get not a penny more than fair market value and relocation costs if those apply. To give $30MM to OG&E if the land isn't worth that much is just inviting a qui tam action as such a move would very arguably be unconstitutional (state monies are not supposed to be spent for private benefit, at least not this directly, tax credits which can be bought and sold through shell corporations are okay, I guess, but I parenthetically digress).

  7. #83

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Blight goes without saying. If C2S isn't blighted, I don't know what. By my mention of Kelo v. New Haven I mostly meant the court of public opinion. Eminent domain is a very controversial issue that everybody seems to have an opinion on. Not everyone has an opinion on downtown development unfortunately, so that last thing we want, is downtown development's positive progress to be overshadowed by a contentious eminent domain controversy. Avoiding that may be the purpose of the $30 mil deal to OG&E, rather than what we may all sort of jump to. Granted, if it smells bad, it usually is. I'm just offering a reasonable positive explanation.

    Yes, you read that right. I'm offering a positive explanation and suggesting something may not be as corrupt as it may sound. Shocking, I know--but don't worry, I'll be back to bitching and moaning about everything in short order. LOL

  8. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Just let me know if I can be of assistance...LOL

  9. #85

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    I don't think public opinion is as big a deal if we're using ED to take out the small landowners and paying ransoms to the big political donors. I don't think that's a hard sell to get public opinion on the side of ED. A court battle with OG&E might be costly, but not $30MM costly.

  10. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Wasn't in the middle of it after all, there was only a couple of minutes left (rest was the Lets Talk Transit).

    I certainly don't doubt Steve's info on the Mayor's instance of the Convention Center alongside the Park in the Core to Shore planning. But after watching the Oversight meeting, everyone seemed committed to the current City line that the site hasn't been chosen and that would be up to the recommendation of the Oversight committee (but decided by the Council of course). But on the surface, I am just not seeing the "this is where it is going to be. Period" Russel Claus in his C2S presentation at 1st indicated (seemingly matter of fact) that the C.C. was going to be along the Park, but moments later corrected himself and stressed it was just a placeholder. A slip? Maybe. Mr. Eric Wenger also stressed to the Committee that the C2S info was just a "concept". He used the Park as an example. While the boundaries of the Park are defined/set, what the design and programming of the Park was in their hands (subject again to the final decision by the Council).

  11. #87

  12. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    See http://blog.newsok.com/okccentral/2010/07/30/4387/ ... I'll give it up to Mayor Cornett on these appointments:

    Those who have watched the convention center selection process with a skeptical eye may be intrigued with the names being submitted by Mayor Mick Cornett for a subcommittee of the MAPS 3 Citizens Advisory Board tasked to determine the best location.

    The chair and vice chair are both from the board itself – Tom McDaniel and Susan Hooper. Also on the committee are Kirk Humphreys, Avis Scaramucci, Russell Perry, Larry Nichols, Roy Williams, Mike Carrier and John D. Williams.

    The committee picks certainly assure a diversity of views going into the site discussion. John D. Williams is general manager of the Skirvin. Nichols is executive chairman of Devon Energy. Carrier is president of the Convention and Visitors Bureau. Roy Williams (Carrier’s boss) is president of the Greater Oklahoma City Chamber. Humphreys preceded Cornett as mayor. Scaramucci is chairwoman of the Bricktown Association. McDaniel is the retired president of Oklahoma City University. Hooper is a self-employed education consultant.

    This committee includes voices very critical of and fiercely committed to Cornett’s favored site south of Ford Center. The appointments follow months of behind-the-scenes efforts to persuade Cornett to create a process that ensures the site selection would be open and not just fixed to favor the south of Ford Center site, which critics argue is too far away from downtown hotels and Bricktown.

  13. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    I agree Doug, it should make for some interesting discussion when they get into it.

  14. #90

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    I'll definitely be interested in the final recommendation of the committee. I'm not that concerned about the location, but think the process will be interesting.

  15. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    I couldn't find a thread dedicated the convention center. Maybe it was lost in the upgrade. I'll just put this here.

    Hereís my idea for the main street site:

    http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...137b26f436980d

    ADVANTAGES:
    -immediately adjacent to Bricktown and could help jumpstart the northern edge that hasnít gone anywhere really.
    -Skirvin would be immediately adjacent (via the Transit Center) and no longer have an ugly 70s-era garage looming over it
    -significant infill of empty lots
    -one or two blocks from all downtown hotels except the Courtyard, which benefits from Ford Center
    -new Aloft would be adjacent as well
    -ideal location for combination w/ Transit Center
    -could serve to link Bricktown and Deep Deuce better

    DISADVANTAGES:
    -or it could become too much of a barrier between the two districts
    -definitely would block some/all views
    -too small?
    Don't Edmond My Downtown

  16. #92

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Quote Originally Posted by jbrown84 View Post
    I couldn't find a thread dedicated the convention center. Maybe it was lost in the upgrade. I'll just put this here.

    Hereís my idea for the main street site:

    http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...137b26f436980d

    ADVANTAGES:
    -immediately adjacent to Bricktown and could help jumpstart the northern edge that hasnít gone anywhere really.
    -Skirvin would be immediately adjacent (via the Transit Center) and no longer have an ugly 70s-era garage looming over it
    -significant infill of empty lots
    -one or two blocks from all downtown hotels except the Courtyard, which benefits from Ford Center
    -new Aloft would be adjacent as well
    -ideal location for combination w/ Transit Center
    -could serve to link Bricktown and Deep Deuce better

    DISADVANTAGES:
    -or it could become too much of a barrier between the two districts
    -definitely would block some/all views
    -too small?
    Nice ideas Jason! Certainly the best location if you go by criteria that prioritizes proximity to Bricktown and existing hotels. And the potential to expand the Skirvin to serve as the convention hotel, while enhancing the visual presence of the Santa Fe garage on Park Place, makes it a strong contender in my opinion.

    Of course, we still need to answer a number of questions concerning size, design, etc, in order to make an informed decision. I hope the Main Street site gets adequate consideration based on objective criteria; I think it will.

  17. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Thanks Blair! Perhaps we could have the Skirvin Tower all over again.
    Don't Edmond My Downtown

  18. #94

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Quote Originally Posted by jbrown84 View Post
    I couldn't find a thread dedicated the convention center. Maybe it was lost in the upgrade. I'll just put this here.

    Here’s my idea for the main street site:

    http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?ie=UT...137b26f436980d

    ADVANTAGES:
    -immediately adjacent to Bricktown and could help jumpstart the northern edge that hasn’t gone anywhere really.
    -Skirvin would be immediately adjacent (via the Transit Center) and no longer have an ugly 70s-era garage looming over it
    -significant infill of empty lots
    -one or two blocks from all downtown hotels except the Courtyard, which benefits from Ford Center
    -new Aloft would be adjacent as well
    -ideal location for combination w/ Transit Center
    -could serve to link Bricktown and Deep Deuce better

    DISADVANTAGES:
    -or it could become too much of a barrier between the two districts
    -definitely would block some/all views
    -too small?
    Yeah at first i thought this seemed like a bad idea but the more i thought about it the better it became. I dont think the barrier between the two districts would be a big deal seeing how the current parking lot is already a huge barrier. One problem i see is the current tracks especially if we want to do light rail on existing tracks up to edmond or even expanding the heartland flyer north... would these run through the convention center? under? how would this work? The other would be parking. The under ground parking would have to be multiple levels covering most of the site or that parking garage very high to replace the parking that is lost in that parking garage and with that surface parking. I dont know the amount of use those lots get but they seem to have a decent amount of cars in them when i see them plus they are expanding so i assume quite a bit.

  19. #95

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Also if you switch the grand opening and the hotel and put another entrance on the other side where Oklahoma dead ends at 2nd with with an open breeze way and some smaller shops or something in there it would be covered connected walking between the two districts. You could have convention space above maybe? This would tie the areas together better than anything else i can think of especially if you give it a decent enough slope so that it can be walked easier than the walnut bridge it would help with ped traffic alot.

  20. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    That's a good idea on the Oklahoma Ave connection. And yes the idea was that the tracks go through/under the building.
    Don't Edmond My Downtown

  21. #97

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    That would make it a very interesting/Unique building. Especially if you built it to go under the walnut bridge. With the rail, bridge and pedestrian walkway through it. That would mean auto traffic, rail traffic, and pedestrian traffic would all go over or through the convention center. And I'm sure we could think of a few ways to make the loss of parking minimal/ non-existent.

  22. #98

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Mine might be one of the views it would block, so perhaps my thoughts should be taken with a grain of salt. However, my biggest concern would be that the convention center architecturally fit into Bricktown, just as we've tried to require other buildings to do, and somewhat succeeded. Since it would be construction funded by the city, there would be no need to be out of compliance at all. Can we afford a building that fits in with Bricktown aesthetically and visually? To my way of thinking, it would need to have many windows, just as buildings in Bricktown do, and be completely faced in brick. I guess, to comply, you could simply board all of the windows over (tongue in cheek here), but I think it would be very difficult to combine the requirements of a convention center with aesthetic requirements. That's why, as on okccentral, I suggest that if we want it as close to Bricktown as possible, we look at the lumber yard. It is immediately adjacent to north-south railroad tracks, if we're wanting rail, would be close to the streetcar lines that have been outlined, and would be near the Co-op, which would then be a desirable location for developers. Also, short of the location south of the Ford Center, it would be closest to Core to Shore, and would therefore help jumpstart that area for development.

    I

  23. #99

    Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    I am with one of the above posters, at first this suggestion was a no. But honestly, I am in favor of it and it makes great sense.

  24. Default Re: MAPS 3 Oversight Board

    Good point betts, about the aesthetics.
    Don't Edmond My Downtown

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. MAPS Fundraising Reports
    By betts in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 12-05-2009, 09:55 PM
  2. Points to consider about MAPS 3
    By Chef in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 12-04-2009, 04:19 PM
  3. New info on MAPS 3
    By metro in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 533
    Last Post: 12-02-2009, 11:56 AM
  4. MAPS 3 proposal almost ready...
    By warreng88 in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 220
    Last Post: 09-28-2009, 09:14 AM
  5. MAPS Impact continues
    By Patrick in forum General Civic Issues
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-22-2005, 01:53 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO